Jan Blomgren: Ny kärnkraft möjlig – men politiken är den stora risken

Jan Bromgren former professor of nuclear physics and contributor here at Epoch Times Nuclear power negotiations have begun in Sweden The area around Ringhals could receive a new reactor What's going on Yes that's exactly what you're saying Now we've taken one more step forward in these discussions There is now someone saying that we are willing to build and that we want to begin the process of accessing the state funding that has been promised The background is that people within the nuclear power industry are feeling some unease It has happened quite often that nuclear power in Sweden has been shut down due to political decisions or political pressure If we also listen to the political parties we can see that several of them could potentially serve as a basis for governance after this autumn's election They have stated they do not want to see new nuclear power Therefore anyone expecting to invest now when enormous sums—on the order of 100 billion kronor and similar amounts—are at stake— want some kind of guarantee against losing their investment without receiving compensation That's precisely what this is about: the government has designed a scheme ensuring investors emerge from the situation unharmed f the policy changes In fact that's been the news of the past few days—that such a process is now underway One hundred billion is a tremendous amount of money The government itself acknowledges that consensus around nuclear power in Sweden is now much broader following the Social Democrats' shift How do you view the political risk I'd probably take that turn by the Social Democrats with a bit of salt I base this on the following The idea is that the intended government basis would be the Social Democrats plus parties that strongly oppose nuclear power Including a party the Green Party which has written in stone that no new nuclear power plants should be built period end of story How to derive that equation isn't entirely obvious I have also read the Social Democrats' energy policy platform which they are campaigning on There one can see that it states we are not against nuclear power But the text certainly doesn't convey much enthusiasm And of course they don’t even mention how much nuclear power they’d actually want let alone how much they might be willing tolerate In contrast in other areas—particularly offshore wind power—specific figures are provided indicating exactly how much we believe should be constructed And so I conclude that whoever says they feel this strongly must believe we should build s likely more driven by the points specifying how much and when and so on and not as motivated in areas where people say well this could probably just be allowed to exist One might therefore wonder how likely it is that the Social Democrats will sacrifice new nuclear power in order to gain power There I want to place a big question mark in haste The future will reveal the answer These negotiations are taking place right now How expensive would it be if one were to start now so to speak And then a change in government during the next four-year term halts all new nuclear power projects What would that even mean for roughly everyone Who ends up bearing the brunt Yes the thing is it's early February now and the election's in September It's barely half a year so it won't accumulate particularly large amounts before then Above all large amounts won't have time to be spent or paid out They haven’t decided yet but now they’re applying for the whole thing Well if there's a government change this fall I don't think it'll involve any massive sums On the other hand if we proceed with another nuclear power plant and the next election in about four years results in a complete halt In that context the amounts involved could be extremely large The Green Party is obviously the one most opposed to nuclear power What they're actually talking about instead is some form of green base load power What do you think of their solution for the power grid Yes I've also studied the Social Democrats' platform and quite honestly been a thoroughly critical and detail-oriented nitpicker That means I've carefully reviewed the statements and while the Green Party has expressed themselves somewhat loosely we could say that If we read the Social Democrats' text I can't help but suspect they've weighed every word on a golden scale What is being said then is that we want offshore wind power in their case After all the Green Party isn't strongly opposed to it and says we need this to generate base power Men's craftsmanship meaning around the clock year-round It means the kind of power you have when the customer demands it rather than just when nature provides it Now we face the challenge that with both wind and solar power we don't have control over when they're generated And if we then say we want this as base load it means we must somehow envision a way to shift electricity usage over time Well here we have a problem—there are simply no effective techniques available to shift electricity usage over time at the scale being discussed here I did a quick calculation here based on the Social Democrats' proposal for 120 terawatt-hours annually offshore wind power If one were to shift the load evenly over time using batteries this would therefore involve a total investment and operating cost which amounts to several hundred times Sweden's national budget So the amounts involved are utterly bizarre if one were to use batteries as the technology Using hydrogen as a technology would not become much cheaper either The possibility of using hydropower to increase or decrease flow in counterphase with wind power generation Yes it hasn't been filled multiple times so we haven't had enough water to do it Oh I'd certainly like to see some investigations into this from the political parties claiming one can harness basc power from these production sources which vary greatly in ways we cannot control Do you really think we'll see an investigation like this if there's a change in government or will they just shut down nuclear power instead I find it hard to believe such an investigation would ever come about I've already done it and presented it and I've also offered all political parties my assistance without the cost of commissioning such a study and so far interest has not been particularly strong one could say And what could happen after the election Yes that could definitely happen If a strong anti-nuclear party—guess which one—gains influence over government formation Well then I think there's a big risk that no new nuclear power plant will be built As for these other proposals I don't think they'll be implemented—they're too far removed from reality It's simply not feasible So I'll conclude by saying we'll stay where we are and that's how it will remain for a few more years The Swedish Armed Forces also have a say when it comes to offshore wind power And they've already blocked parking spots because they're simply safety hazards It's harder to monitor the Baltic Sea and the Atlantic Ocean when wind turbines are in the way and making noise But this company currently involved in negotiations is actually a group of companies They are called Widerberg Kraft AB What do we know about them Quite a lot And it makes very good sense Because today we have Ringhals AB Ringhals AB is owned by approximately 70% of Vattenfall State-owned company stating we could envision building nuclear power And 30% of Juniper A company that today is almost entirely owned by the German state Even though the plan is for the German state to sell off its holdings within a few years Juniper couldn't care less about new nuclear power being built in Sweden Not surprisingly for anyone following German politics That means Ringhals AB cannot serve as a basis for new nuclear power Instead they have now established a new company called Widerberg Kraft AB A very fitting name given that the port in Ringhals is called Widerbergshamn It just happens to be named that way Thus Widerberg Kraft AB is a new company in which Vattenfall and other firms are shareholders Other companies Juniper among them The reason for this is partly that we want owners who are involved and help cover the cost of the celebration One might wonder why Vattenfall doesn't do this alone Yes there's a very simple explanation It's simply the case and Vattenfall has said so themselves There are no secrets here They have a fairly tight budget They've taken on substantial bank loans for other investments Wind power in other countries for example is not limited to Sweden This means that if they were to go to the bank alone they could borrow the funds needed to build a new nuclear power plant That would cause them to lose their favorable credit rating The fact that the company is considered solvent means it can secure fairly low interest rates Men if he were to take out additional loans now Then the banks would come back and say that now you don't have the same level of security you had before Now you're allowed to pay even higher interest on loans for money you've already borrowed The overall impact would be quite significant for Vattenfall which is why the company wants to share the risk with someone What has mainly sparked discussion is a company called Industrikraft Industrial Power is therefore a collaborative enterprise between major electricity users in Swedish industry Some have said that we who need electricity are willing to contribute financially to new nuclear power in order to secure the energy we require So these are the major players Vattenfall and Industrikraft are the key players in this context Personally I think this is a very good design We've seen this especially in Finland And when those who need a lot of electricity also invest in electricity production that has so far been a recipe for success Because someone with a paper mill steel plant chemical factory or similar facility requires a large amount of electricity Investments in this type of infrastructure are made with a view to many decades ahead A paper machine might operate for 30 to 40 years after it's built That's why we should invest in nuclear power to secure affordable electricity for decades to come It's quite appealing it results in similar time horizons We see extreme cases of this in the United States There large data centers are being built with companies like Meta set to establish their own networks and in-house production Is this a trend we can expect to see more of around the world The fact that private entities are stepping in to buy create or produce electricity for their own consumption What are the societal implications of this and how can it be regulated effectively It seems likely that it will turn out that way How much It depends on how much politics gets involved and how much political support is provided If governments genuinely facilitate the construction of electricity generation for their own benefit regardless of who ultimately purchases the electricity As a result the need for large electricity consumers to build their own power generation will decrease Finns det el att köpa så köper de hellre det They’d rather buy it if they can get it cheap It's not as though major electricity users love building and owning power generation It's a result of them realizing they need a great deal of electricity And yet they don’t believe the rest of society will be able to provide it The most glaring example of this is in the AI and IT industries There one can envision vastly greater electricity usage than we have today One can easily foresee that each facility will consume far more electricity than what is currently possible by connecting to a national power grid Therefore it's not possible to charge as much electricity as desired at a single point from a national power grid That's why the goal is to have electricity generation located as close as possible to data centers in this case The space next door is ideal and then you can simply run a massive aluminum or copper strip from one to the other and connect them directly that way There's a logic to all this rooted in the belief that there's a massive demand for electricity that the general power grid won't be able to meet One final question Could this have negative consequences for ordinary consumers What if there are more producers and those who produce do so more for their own needs than for any form of general societal benefit Then comes that usual boring response It depends Large electricity users take responsibility for generating their own power and largely disconnect from the rest of the grid It can be both good and bad depending on how it's done If it's now about it being completely disconnected from the rest of the network then they might not go anywhere at all Even if you don’t connect these installations they’ll still end up linking to the rest of the system in some way If this leads politicians to become overly pleased that the AI industry is handling the workload and thus avoid responsibility for the rest of the country's electricity consumption then it's hardly a successful outcome On the other hand if those groups take care of their own needs we can focus on the needs of ordinary households and similar cases If this leads to easing the burden on the political aspects of electricity production allowing policy to better meet the needs of smaller industries and individuals then yes it could prove beneficial I need to ask a follow-up question What we're seeing in Sweden right now is a consortium of companies coming together to finance new nuclear power Should Finland's regulations in Sweden be adjusted to enable more private actors to develop large-scale electricity production Yes it's really not a problem—there are so to speak no laws specifying who is allowed to build The thing is there are many ways to generate electricity Right now we're talking about nuclear power but there are also other methods Well there aren't any laws that say companies of that kind can't build a combined heat and power plant No it doesn't look like that does it Instead it's open What's regulated is who is allowed to operate the facilities There's nuclear power heavily regulated hydroelectricity and a bit of lightly regulated hydro In the case of nuclear power plants it's the case that whoever owns the local nuclear power pla You will need to obtain a driver's license or permit to operate the facility within the station area But of course it's just a procedure—you simply need to contact the Radiation Safety Authority And they set demands—we expect you to be skilled at this this and this One must convince the Radiation Safety Authority that they possess the necessary competence o be able to operate the facility safely and securely But then exactly what is written on the business card and who pays the salary and so on What matters isn't the ownership but having the right expertise within the company operating the facility And that’s also why Viderberg Kraft AB was established In Sweden each nuclear power plant is a separate company with different owners No nuclear power plant in Sweden has just one owner But it's not a holding company and it's not Vattenfall that holds the license to operate Ringhals However it is Ringhals AB where Vattenfall owns approximately 70 percent and Juniper owns about 30 percent Therefore it is not the holding companies that have the right to operate but the local nuclear power stock company ose who have the right to operate the facility and here Viderberg Kraft AB is currently seeking It is intended to be the company that will hold the license to operate the new units on the Ringhals site